If you live in the 14th District we strongly encourage you to vote for her in the upcoming primary. Also, forward this to friends and family members in the District.

Please make a donation to her. You may do this through her web site.

If you live outside the 14th District, you may still make a donation to her campaign. Please do so.The Faith and Freedom PAC is beginning fundraising to specifically help elect a number of state candidates whom we feel are Christian, Conservative and Capable. You may donate to Faith and Freedom PAC here to help us in this effort.

Much hangs in the balance. The opportunity to change leadership is significant and will soon pass. We must seize this moment.

Tuesday, June 29, 2010

This story is one of two philosophies--two value systems. It is the best of times and the worst of times, depending on what you believe.

For secular progressives entrenched in the experimental social laboratories called public education, it was the best of times.

Veterans Memorial Elementary school in Provincetown, Mass. announced a new "safe-sex" policy which provides condoms to children as young as kindergarten.

The school board voted unanimously to implement the program this fall when classes begin. Superintendent Beth Singer fully supported it.

Last week she told FOX News, "Children engage in sexuality with or without counseling, with or without condom availability."

She declared the kids would only have to ask a school nurse or counselor for a condom, the child's parents would not be notified, and if parents became aware, there was nothing they could do about it. If parents want to opt their children out, their request would not be honored.

This was kind of a developing story last week that I was following, but had not written about.

When the new policy was first announced, Singer said there was essentially no reaction. She told Fox she got one call and it was supportive.

Provincetown, known for its beautiful beaches and large homosexual community, was about to be rocked.

A Fox station in Boston ran a story Wednesday night titled, "Condoms At School" and that's when Singer said, "everything changed."

It became the worst of times for the far left progressives.

By 2 AM, Massachusetts Family Institute issued a statement saying, "Making condoms available to first graders bullies parents to submit to an agenda that promotes sexual promiscuity to innocent children at their most vulnerable age."

MFI continued, "The Provincetown school committee's decision to force this radical and absurd policy demonstrates the lengths to which some will go to emasculate parent's rights and undermine the notion of encouraging children to delay sexual activity."

From there, newspapers and radio talk shows picked up the story and America heard that they were giving little kids condoms on Cape Cod.

By noon, Governor Deval Patrick, who is a Democrat and running for re-election against two conservative candidates, called to complain about the school's decision not to tell the parents.

Patrick then called the Associated Press to tell them he was concerned about counseling and access being age appropriate, and for young kids, that parents be involved." He promised that Singer had promised to, "walk this back a bit."

At 1:42 PM, AP ran the story.

At 3: PM, Singer's secretary says the school board offices were facing "shell shock" from the number of calls they were receiving.

At 4: PM, the school blinked and the chairman of the board told the Boston Globe, "We're going to revisit it."

By Thursday morning Singer would tell FOX that she "knew the policy wouldn't work in every school district around the country, but that in Provincetown it's the correct policy in order to protect kids."

Granted, this is a local issue, but it points to a larger and explosive issue. Public schools are and have been systematically undermining parental authority, while advancing a secular, often experimental, social agenda.

The public is not only fed up with corrupt and double speaking politicians, but a public school system that is, on the one hand miserably failing, while on the other hand, re-educating your kids, striping the moral principals they have been taught in the home, while dismissing your parental authority.

When caught, they usually respond much like the account above.

They have since modified their scheme to provide condoms only to 5th through 12th grades and parents will now have the right to opt out their children. Not a victory, but a step in the right direction.

If we are vigilant and informed and are unafraid to speak up and call things for what they are, we can pierce the thick veil of political correctness and help bring restoration to a broken culture.Thank you for supporting us.

Monday, June 28, 2010

The process begins today. An alliance of more than 850 rabbis say, "No!" And they are saying so with force.

Rabbi Yehuda Levin, spokesman for the more than 850-member Rabbinical Alliance for America says, "Elena Kagan is not kosher. She is not fit to sit on this court---or any court."

Much has been made by the President and others about Kagan being the second Jewish woman on the Supreme Court. However, Levin says, "We take no pride in this."

"We feel," he says, "that Elena Kagan turns traditional Judaism on its head---from a concept of a nation of priests and holy people, she is turning it into, 'Let's homosexualize every segment of society'. And by the way, partial-birth-babies have no right to be delivered."

Levin and the Rabbinical Alliance is asking the Senate Judiciary Committee to refuse to confirm Kagan.

In their letter to the Judiciary Committee the rabbis said:

"It is clear from Ms. Kagan's record on issues such as abortion-on-demand, partial-birth abortion, the radical homosexual and lesbian agenda, the 'supremacy' of the anti-family panoply over religious liberties of biblical adherents,et.,al., that she will function as a flame-throwing radical, hastening society's already steep decline into Sodom and Gomorrah."

As of this past weekend, the prominent Jewish members, Sen. Diane Feinstien D-Cal. and Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., who serve on the Committee, had not responded to the Alliance's letter, nor would they comment to CNS News who was asking for their response.

Senator Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., the highest ranking Republican member on the Committee told CBS News yesterday that a filibuster could happen, "If things come out to indicate she's so far outside the mainstream."

Honestly, I doubt the Republicans could successfully filibuster simply due to lack of numbers, even if they had the resolve to do so.

The big issue is this.

America and the State of Washington desperately need new elected leadership. However, we must be very careful with our vote.

Our primary objective is not to restore a political party to prominence. We are attempting to elect men and women of character, who actually hold conservative fiscal and social values.

This is not a time to elect leaders who will say one thing to the folks, then, once elected, vote differently.

I will be introducing you to several such candidates over the next few weeks. These are candidates that we feel can make a difference when elected.

Friday, June 25, 2010

Following the US Supreme ruling on R-71 names yesterday, I have been talking with many from the press, both locally and nationally.

A question that has been raised in several different ways is, "Would you do it again?"

Another related question goes something like this: "If the names are released to the public, will it have a chilling effect on people signing future petitions to repeal same-sex marriage in Washington State?"

I get what the press and a few others are saying.

First, we did not enter into the R-71 campaign lightly or without a great deal of prayer and discussion with leaders from various faith organizations and specifically with a number of elected officials who are also people of faith.

Obviously there were those who disagreed and voiced their opposition from the rooftop.

A number of state senators and state representatives not only agreed with R-71, but actively participated in the petition gathering.

Senators Dan Swecker, Val Stevens, Janea Holmquist, Pam Roach and others in the senate strongly supported the effort and spoke on the record in opposition to the "everything but marriage" bill.

Representative Matt Shea was part of the leadership team of R-71. Other representatives joined in active support.

In fact, Senator Dan Swecker told us privately, we must run R-71 and told his colleagues in the Senate prior to their vote, that "this will be our last opportunity to vote on same-sex marriage," urging them to reject the bill.

Those beliefs were reflected by a number of other elected leaders. They simply were not in the majority of the present Legislature. You can change that.

You will recall that Republican Senators Dale Brandland, Curtis King and Cheryl Pflug broke from their colleagues and voted in support of the homosexual agenda and against defending marriage.

Our involvement was a prayerful one.

Yes, I would do it again.

The opposition had many faces and yes, it hurt personally. It was not, however, about me or Larry Stickney or Matt Shea or Dan Swecker or Val Stevens or Pastors Roy and Valerie Hartwell and all the others who supported it. It was and is about a fundamental principle of standing in support of natural marriage, which is the cornerstone of every successful society.

Natural marriage is biblical and it is right. And it is essential to a sustainable and healthy culture.With all of us, it was never about political posturing. It was about standing for righteousness.

There are few, if any, including the sponsors of the bill itself, who do not admit that "everything but marriage" was an incremental, perhaps the last incremental step to same-sex marriage in Washington State.

Yes, I will do it again, if necessary.

Will releasing the names of those who signed petitions have a chilling effect on people signing future petitions that oppose homosexual marriage?

I don't know. Each individual will be required to look into their own heart and make that decision should it be necessary.

As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord, and we will do so actively and boldly, speaking biblical principles and biblical truth into the culture at every opportunity.

Even if we were to be the proverbial "voice crying in the wilderness," we would continue. And I believe many others share that commitment.

At age 22, I stood at an altar in my home church in the Yakima Valley and promised God I would follow wherever He would lead me. Marjorie and I have been true to that to the best of our ability. That promise has taken us to ministering to kids in Seattle, Salem, Oregon and North Hollywood, California and serving as lead pastor to a couple of great churches. It has taken us to helping start and build over 140 Christian churches in countries from Kenya to Korea. It has led us to use television and radio and the entertainment industry to advance the Christian message.

We have been blessed and tried by fire.

There are Christian leaders who have said the battle for marriage is lost in Washington State---we must recognize that we are now post Christian.

I do not agree.

It does not seem that we need leaders who posture politically so much as we need Christians standing publicly for what is right--- for what is biblical, humbly praying for another great awakening and a spiritual, political and cultural restoration.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

UPDATE: James Bopp Jr. Press Release__________The US Supreme Court ruled this morning that the names of those who signed the R-71 petitions can be made public.

However, the names cannot be released to the homosexual activists immediately.

The final decision will rest in a lower court, in that we have the option to ask the lower court for an exemption from disclosure in this case only.

I just finished a phone conference with our attorney James Bopp Jr. and we will be going to the lower court on count 2, seeking an exemption for R-71 petition signers only.

We see releasing the names as having a very chilling effect on citizen's exercise of free speech and participation in the initiative process. Particularly in those cases where threats have been made publicly toward those who signed.

The winners in this ruling by the Supreme Court are the media and, of course, Secretary of State Sam Reed and Attorney General Rob McKenna. Supporting briefs, advocating for the release of the names, have been filed with the court by 22 news organizations and media trade associations.This matter is not settled yet.

V.I. Lenin described unthinking supporters of his dictatorship in the Soviet Union as "useful idiots."

It's time to think.

It's time to ask hard questions.

It's time to become active and vocal.

"Unthinking" people are enabling an administration to build a power base that undermines the very foundations of the greatest nation on the Earth. Our fiscal foundations and our social foundations.

Here are some of the ways it is advancing.

Columnist Thomas Sowell wrote in the Investors Business Daily this week, "When Adolf Hitler was building up his NAZI movement of the 1920s, leading up to his taking power in the 1930s, he deliberately sought to activate people who did not normally pay much attention to politics."

They were useful.

Sowell says they were particularly susceptible to Hitler's rhetoric and had far less basis for questioning his assumptions and conclusions.

Sowell and others are expressing concern about the $20 billion President Obama is extracting from BP. Not that he or others don't think BP should pay all the damages, whatever the amount----it's the way the President is using the moment.

He and others don't believe the President has constitutional "authority to extract vast sums of money from private enterprise and distribute it as he sees fit to whomever he deems worthy of compensation."

He's right. The Constitution says that private property is not to be confiscated by the government without "due process of the law."

Sowell says, "If you believe the end justifies the means, then you don't believe in constitutional government."

He says, "If the agreement with BP was an isolated event, perhaps we might hope that it would not be a precedent. But there is nothing isolated about it."

Indeed it is not isolated. This is part of a pattern of behavior that leads to tyranny. Each crisis is an opportunity. You will recall that the Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel said we cannot allow a "crisis" to go to "waste" as an opportunity to expand the power of government.

The President, it appears, is also overreaching his authority of social issues.

Needing to appease the anger of the homosexual activists who helped elect him he is now announcing that he will arbitrarily take the Family Medical and Leave Act and tweak it to include homosexuals who are living together and raising children.

Can he legally do this?

Many feel, including myself, that his action violates the Defense of Marriage Act---which he has promised to repeal, that clearly defines marriage as between one man and one woman and defines "spouse" as being of the opposite sex.

Tragically, some Christians and Christian leaders continue to maintain that they feel "uncomfortable" addressing the homosexual issues of our day. If the church doesn't lead on moral issues, who will? No wonder our country has to some degree lost its moral compass.

Our Founders knew the importance of Christian leadership in the culture. Hopefully we will discover that importance before we allow an "exceptional" nation with an exceptional destiny, to slip into the dustbin of history as a former city on a hill.

The secular socialists are counting on your silence and detachment from the process.

Ramming through the Obamacare health plan is a colossal example of how a tyrannical government works.

There seems to be a pattern of imperialism---of subverting the Constitution.

And he is counting on the masses to be silent. Uninformed or simply uninterested.

Here's how it works:

America was founded on the fundamental principle stated in the Declaration of Independence---"all people are created equal---endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights."

If you want to create a tyrannical government or dictatorship for that matter, using the mechanisms of a constitutional republic, your actions must fit the historical nature of the society.The only rightful use of force is to uphold the law, the only just law is that which protects inalienable rights, so, to increase personal power you must "discover" more "rights" and protect them.

This is insidious because it actually puts those who seek power in a position to never have to argue for more power.

This strategy enables them to become the "advocate" for the downtrodden---the disenfranchised. Those with new found rights.

This is exactly what happened with healthcare. For two and a half centuries, America provided opportunity for individuals to prosper and improve their lot in life, in any number of ways. Over time it became apparent that we needed to reform some aspects of our healthcare in America. The secular socialists seized the opportunity to remake the country rather than restore it and redistribute the wealth all in one fell swoop.

Healthcare is now a "right" and they are advocating for the downtrodden.

The far left declared, a couple of months ago, that abortion is now a "right".

Yes we can.

Homosexual "marriage" is now a "right". Social justice. Equality.

The list of new found "rights" is as long as is needed to "remake" America.

Cloaked in deception, public education is re-educating our children to these new "truths" while secular socialists continue to grab power.

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

President Obama seems to be operating on that premise in regard to his promises to homosexuals who helped elect him.

Incrementalism. Remember the frog in the kettle.

Senator Ed Murray, Representative Jamie Pederson, and other elected homosexual activists in the Washington State Legislature are following the same game plan as they and their allies continue to re-educate citizens in the State and continue their redefinition of marriage and family.

Homosexual activists in both Washingtons have expressed anger at the lack of progress.

Yesterday, President Obama ticked off a list of things he has done for the homosexuals to a select group of homosexual activists gathered at the White House.

Of note: One of those meeting with the President yesterday was Constance McMillen. Remember her? She was the teenage lesbian who wanted to take her girlfriend to their high school prom a couple of months ago, was denied, filed a lawsuit assisted by the ACLU, received a $30,000 check from "Ellen" and will now be the grand marshal of the NYC gay pride parade this next weekend.

One of the things the President announced to the activists yesterday, was that he, using an existing law, will now be able to give them up to 12-weeks maternity leave from their jobs for the adoption process.

He is working hard to please them, including his "shout out" to families with "two fathers" in his Father's Day Proclamation last weekend.

But they're not happy.

Fred Sainz, VP of Human Rights Campaign, the largest homosexual advocacy organization in Washington DC says, somewhat defending the President, "People wrongly assume that having Democrat majorities in Congress means that your legislative goals will be met. That's not the case."

Lane Hudson, long time homosexual activist who actually interrupted Bill Clinton while he was defending his own administration's handling of homosexual demands says, "The people in the White House have to realize that issues of equality are not controversial."

Two things.

First, keep in mind that because the homosexual agenda is moving slowly doesn't mean there is any loss of commitment on their part to re-engineer the culture. It is the steadfast resistance by people of faith that holds back evil.

Secondly, there is an orchestrated effort to elect, not just liberal or progressive legislators, but homosexual activist legislators, both nationally and in individual states. Tim Gill and other wealthy homosexuals are supporting various political campaigns around the country of candidates who will vote in favor of homosexual "marriage" and its related agenda.

And a third thing. Equality should not be controversial. I agree. Equality should also not be confused with sexual preference. The demands of homosexuals do not equate to the civil rights struggles of African Americans. Legalizing and celebrating perversion must always be controversial. Equality for people of all races must never be.

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Planned Parenthood Federation of America's audits show they spent $657.1 million between 2002 and 2008 from federal government grants and programs.

However, the beast took in $2.3 billion from government grants and programs during the same period.

So, the common folks would ask, "Where's the money?"

This report, the first of its kind, was only released after 31 US senators and representatives demanded it.

Planned Parenthood admits to having killed 1.8 million pre-born babies during that period, but where's the $2.3 billion in tax dollars?

Rita Diller at The Washington Times is asking, "Has Planned Parenthood managed to tuck away mega millions of our tax dollars, seemingly unnoticed? Or is that much of its government funding coming from sources other than the federal government? Or is there a problem with the way Planned Parenthood is reporting its expenditures of our federal monies?"

Diller says, "Yes Planned Parenthood has other sources of government funding---state and local---but historical data indicate it is simply not believable that such a large amount of its funding is from local or state sources."

Planned Parenthood has not yet released their 2008-09 fiscal report even though their 2009-10 fiscal report is due within the next two weeks.

What are they hiding? Where's the money?

Although they have the blood of innocents on their hands, can't they at least come clean on what they are doing with our federal tax dollars?

As you may have read, there is a growing shift toward life and away from abortion in our country. With the possibility, a strong possibility, of a shift in power in Congress after the upcoming elections, this very well may be a time when we will move toward life and away from death.

Much hangs in the balance.

We are doing all we can do to help bring about a change in leadership locally and nationally. Thank you to those who have recently stepped up to help us financially.

Your financial support allows us to continue. Your words encourage us. And your prayers sustain us. The opposition has many faces.

It is becoming apparent that President Obama's Supreme Court choice is a pragmatic person who values politics over policy.

This past Friday, tens of thousands of pages of her emails, sent during her years as an aid to President Clinton, were released.

During that period her propensity toward politics and pragmatism clearly trumped policy or core beliefs. An example was her warning then Vice President Al Gore not to endorse a religious freedom issue, even though she personally described herself as a big fan of it, because she feared it would create a "gay/lesbian firestorm."

She wrote, "We'll let you know when it's safe to go back into the water."

The emails under review show her role in managing scandals during the Clinton administration and reveal her pragmatic streak in dealing with complex issues like abortion, gun control and drug sentencing.

Senator Jeff Sessions, R-Alabama, said the documents he has seen have shown a "troubling pattern."

Sessions told Associated Press, "Throughout her career, she has demonstrated a willingness to make legal decisions based not on law, but instead on her very liberal politics."

Not only did Kagan lead in removing the US military from Harvard campus, but has shown little respect for the law, giving preference to her personal beliefs and far left agenda.

Many in Congress feel this will guide her decisions, making it nearly impossible to be an impartial judge. Unfortunately, those who share those concerns are in the minority in Congress.

Indeed a "troubling pattern," has emerged from the record of her professional life. One that mirrors the record of her friend who nominated her.

We have an opportunity to change the make up of Congress and the state Legislature this year.

Thank you for working with us to help bring about this change.Be Informed. Be Vigilant. Be Prayerful. Be Blessed.

Friday, June 18, 2010

A new Rasmussen poll shows 72% of Republicans feel the Republicans they elected to Congress are out of touch with their (the voters) core values.

In 2006, polls showed that many, perhaps millions, of evangelicals simply did not vote because of a lack of confidence in the candidates who were running for office.

In 2008, after an aggressive outreach to Christians, a good number of evangelicals heeded the call from Barack Obama and voted for him, believing he best represented their values.

Regret?

Why do you vote? What motivates you to vote for one candidate over another----or simply to vote at all?

We are going to keep our "Patty Murray" poll up for a few more days, then we will take it down until the ballots are mailed out for the primary election. At that time we will reintroduce the same question, regarding the same candidates to compare results of now with then.

Today, we have put up a new Faith and Freedom survey that asks this question: What Motivates You Most Strongly To Vote ?

You are given the following options:

*To support a particular political party.

*A Christian command to be salt and light.

*A candidate who reflects my values and will stand firm on those values once elected.

*A desire to see integrity returned to politics.

*A candidate who is a good administrator and leader regardless of his or her personal values.

I'm certain several of these options may be true for many of us, however we are asking which Most Strongly motivates you to vote.

Thursday, June 17, 2010

Please take a moment to participate in our Patty Murray Survey. We are asking who you favor to run against her in the November election. If you have comments about the candidates, please post your thoughts._________________

I had an eerie feeling of dejavu listening to President Obama's speech the other night.

It felt too much like July 15, 1979.

President Obama made many feel like the "malaise" President Carter described nearly 30 years ago. I know he didn't use the word "malaise," but one of his staff did in describing his fateful speech, and it stuck.

Some of Obama's strongest supporters are now beginning to turn on him.

Back in 1979 Carter said, "I'm proposing a bold conservation program to involve every state, county, and city and every average American in our energy battle."

In 2010 Obama is saying, "Tonight I'd like to lay out for you what our battle plan is going to be."

Both seeing the energy issue as a war.

In '79 Carter said, "In little more than two decades we've gone from a position of energy independence to one in which almost half the oil we use comes from foreign countries at prices that are going through the roof."

In 2010, President Obama is saying, "I laid out a set of principles that would move our country towards energy independence."

Not only is President Obama sounding like President Carter, he seems to be leading like President Carter.

And his strongest supporters in the media are upset and are comparing him to Jimmy Carter.

Chris Matthews at MSNBC said Obama is trying to push the exact same transition that "broke Carter," and he worked for Carter.

Matthews, who has been an outspoken advocate of President Obama and Keith Olbermann observed on air that Obama didn't seem to have command of the situation. Matthews said of Obama, "I don't sense executive command."

Olbermann concluded, "It was a great speech if you were on a different planet for the past 57 days."

And therein is the problem.

A man who has excelled in acquiring academic entitlements, now out of the classroom and community organizing in South Chicago, finds himself on another planet.

It's called the real world. It is no longer classroom hypotheticals, but real problems with real consequences.

And he isn't able to lead in this new environment. The New York Times was questioning his ability to lead even before the speech earlier this week.

Rather than leading, President Obama has spent a year and a half blaming George W. Bush for every problem that exists in America.

He has made "Blaming Bush" a cottage industry, which worked for him for a while, but as the economy became his economy and the unemployment numbers became his unemployment numbers and record budget deficits became his deficits and his healthcare plan now faces a strong majority of Americans who want it repealed, reality is dawning.

Not only does he presently have the lowest approval rating in his presidency, but a recent Public Policy Poll hands him the ultimate chink in the armor. Their polling finds more Louisiana people believe that George W. Bush did a better job handling Hurricane Katrina, than Barack Obama has done with the BP oil spill.

But there is good news.

After Jimmy Carter came Ronald Reagan.

The next two years will define what America, our state and our communities are to become over the next many decades.

The future is in the hands of God and He has, in this country, given "we the people" the right and the responsibility to choose our leaders and our future.

Choose well.

Faith and Freedom is doing everything we possibly can do to Inform and Inspire and Involve as many people as possible in the up coming elections.

Your financial support allows us to do this. With it we can continue, without it we cannot. Thanks for standing with us.

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

If you have not done so, please participate in our Patty Murray survey. It's interesting to watch the percentages remain somewhat constant while participation continues very strong.______________

Following the November 2008 election, Secretary of State Sam Reed wrote an op-ed piece strongly suggesting that in order to win, the Republican Party should move away from the so-called "social issues" that have become divisive. He pointed to himself and Attorney General Rob McKenna as examples.

Last week, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels, (R.) said the next president, "Would have to call a truce on so-called social issues."

Can social issues and fiscal issues really be divorced from one another in regard to the health and well being of our country and communities?

Our Founding Fathers certainly did not believe that, nor have our truly outstanding leaders and presidents over our 200 plus year history.

It's a fact that the out of control spending and debt created by our government, regardless of motive, is for the most part directed toward social problems.

While so-called "moderates," which I think means you kind of believe in things and kind of don't believe in things, promise to reduce the size of government as a fiscal conservative, while not addressing the so-called hot button social issues, are promising to address big government without addressing the conditions that allows big government to thrive and grow.

Are they oblivious to the fact that it is the moral breakdown in our cultural that has caused millions of Americans to look to government and ultimately depend on government for their very existence?

She says, "In the not-to-distant past, we had a society where husbands and fathers were the providers for their families. The 1.7 million out-of-wedlock babies born last year (41 percent of all births) and their unmarried moms, now look to Big Brother as their financial provider."

Schlafly says, "The decline of marriage is not only the biggest social problem America faces today, but also government's biggest financial problem."

She points to the 1965 Moynihan Report on how welfare handouts destroy families by giving financial handouts to women, thereby making husbands and fathers irrelevant, as perhaps the most prophetic government report ever written.

So many financial incentives have been written into federal appropriation laws that incent and promote cohabitation, rather than marriage, that the government has become a significant part of the problem. And has transferred power to those who hand out the money.

Even Obamacare contains a marriage penalty and incentives co-habitation.

The number of unmarried, co-habitating couples has gone from 430,000 in 1960 to 6.8 million in 2008. And no, homosexual marriage is not part of the solution.

The decline of natural marriage is a major cause of the growth of our welfare state.

This year taxpayers are spending $350 billion to support single moms. Should they be abandoned? Absolutely not. But if the state didn't demand to be so "separated" from the church, much could happen to help ease this issue, while addressing the root problem of restoring and strengthening natural marriages.

Can a candidate who recommends ignoring such issues be capable or even fit for public office in America?

Additional costs, perhaps billions of dollars, are spent on social problems related to teenage crime, drugs, STDs, teen pregnancies, runaways and school drop outs. These additional expenses are most often related to households headed only by a female.

Political correctness makes us silent. Afraid to speak. And we keep throwing money at the symptoms, rather than addressing the "so-called social issues": While the government grows under the guise of doing good, and the people's freedoms are diminished.

The secular progressives allow this problem to evolve and expand, while they gather power by spending and controlling more and more money---all without remedy or cure for those they claim to help.

You should know, 70% of unmarried women voted for Obama. Why? Probably because he and his people represented the biggest handouts.

Abortion is another social issue that impacts the economy. I personally oppose it on biblical grounds. "Thou shalt not kill." However it has a negative impact on the economy.

Our grave problems are both social and fiscal.

Are these so-called moderates running from morality, Judeo-Christian values upon which this country was publicly built or history itself?

Good grief. Even Confucius called natural marriage "The foundation of civilization."

Moderates are willing to stand by while marriage, morality, and life itself is undermined, redefined and diminished, saying, "we should sit this out---let's call a truce on these social issues." And they claim money and their elitism will fix things.

As you consider who you will vote for in a number of political races this year, keep in mind, those who feel abandonment of the social issues of our day is a good strategy, they are telling you they are only willing to address the symptoms---not the causes.

Our problems are not academic, as our President is discovering, they are social and fiscal and moral. A true leader will understand this.

Those who promote "sitting it out" on the real issues, are at best smitten by self ambition and ignorance---and at worst are part of the problem, not the solution.

Be very vigilant with your vote. Be wary of those who refuse to address social issues. Run from those who suggest ignoring them or "trucing them".

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Thank you for the great response to our current survey regarding your preference to which candidate should run against Senator Patty Murray.

If you have not yet voted, please do. A good snapshot of our reader's opinion is developing.

In our best effort to inform, we will be conducting several surveys over the next couple of weeks.As announced last month, we are developing a voter's guide that will be available for distribution in churches and other interested organizations.

The information will also be available on the Faith and Freedom website.

Thank you for your financial support. It is essential to our being able to gather and publish the information that will help people of faith and conservatives make informed decisions.

Monday, June 14, 2010

As of this past Friday, 15 candidates had filed for the US Senate seat now held by Patty Murray. Faith and Freedom is requesting your input on this primary race.

We have a new survey asking which one of five names do you prefer to run against Patty Murray. To comment on this race, click the link below and use the comment form for this blog. If you prefer some one not listed, please indicate in your comments.

Friday, June 11, 2010

On Wednesday, former US Representative Linda Smith, of Vancouver, stood with the mother of a teenage "sex slave" girl in a First Avenue parking lot adjacent to a downtown Seattle strip club.

It was part protest and part celebration.

Dominque Davon Booker, a pimp who has been using the mother's child and other children to pay his bills, is now locked up.

The Seattle PI says Linda and others were celebrating new legislation that "mandate significant increases in the penalties faced by those convicted of pimping children while preventing those accused of paying children for sex from simply claiming they thought the child was of age."

Since her service as a US Representative, Smith has founded Shared Hope International, an organization committed to fighting sex trafficking and providing help for the victims of the sex industry.

She told the PI, "This bill starts the process. It simply cannot be tolerated to buy a child by the hour or by the act."

King County Prosecutor, Dan Satterburg echoed her sentiments--- "Were talking about kids who were taken off the streets and made sex slaves."

While this bill is a good start, Linda Smith and others are pressing for both enforcement of the new law and for more help for the casualties---the little kids and their families.

I am personally impacted by this in that I have seen, first hand, the resulting devastation to families and children, during the years I served as a youth minister in Seattle, Salem, Or. and North Hollywood, Ca.

I am often critical of both Governor Gregoire and the majority in the State Legislature, however, I take heart that sometimes, not often, but sometimes, good things can come from them.

Thank you to the Legislature for passing this bill, to Governor Gregoire for signing it and for law enforcement who will enforce it.

Tiberius Barasa, a Kenyan government expert, is thrilled with Obama's involvement. He said, "The USA is being like a big brother."

Beware, Mr. Barasa, beware.

Why is President Obama doing this? And why is he spending up to $10 million to promote passage of a new constitution in Kenya?

Others are asking these questions as well.

Representative Chris Smith says Congress was originally told it would be about $2 million, but now it appears it will exceed $10 million.

Steven Ertelt, of LIFENEWS, says one of the reasons Obama is doing what he is doing is to promote and help pass a pro-abortion constitution.

"And that," says Rep. Smith, "is illegal."

Ertelt says, "Although the draft contains language advocating the right to life for unborn children, it contains a section with a health exception that essentially opens the nation to unlimited abortions throughout pregnancy for any reason."

This mirrors President Obama's "M.O." in America as well. He says he wants to reduce the number of abortions while creating policy that expands them. He says he doesn't believe in homosexual marriage, while he is busily setting the table for marriage to be redefined by abolishing DOMA.

Hypocrisy.

Rep. Smith, the leading Republican on the House Africa and Global Health Subcommittee, and two other members of Congress have called for a probe into the Obama administration's spending in support of a campaign to get the pro-abortion constitution approved.

Lobbying for or against abortion is prohibited under a provision of federal law known as the Siljander Amendment annually included in the State, Foreign Operations Appropriations Act.

Obama told the Kenyans via KBC, "people are frustrated" about their problems and, "This is an opportunity to fix many things."

Oh, yes. We've heard that line before as well. We know this administration doesn't miss the opportunities of a crisis to advance their agenda.

And speaking of crises. Does the President think things are going so well for him here in this country that he can branch out and "remake" other countries now? Or is he developing other employment options---just in case?

In either case, we have elected a man to the highest office in the land who deeply believes in advancing the abortion agenda. Worldwide.

Wednesday, June 09, 2010

A publishing company that publishes and distributes copies of the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence in booklet form, has added a disclaimer. That's right, a disclaimer.

The disclaimer begins with this: "This book is a product of its own time and does not reflect the same values as it would if it were written today."

And there's more. I'll come back to that in a moment with details.

Yesterday, 11 more states held their primary elections and the electorate as well as the media reflected, once again, the passion with which people participated in the election process.

While the contests are characterized and analyzed in terms of Republican, Democrat, Constitution Party, Tea Party, etc., as they should be, the passion runs deeper than a party or label.

The upcoming election is about two different views of what America is and should become. I personally believe 2010 and 2012 will be the most important and defining elections in the history of this nation. I am not alone in that belief.

The disclaimer on the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence reflects a great division in our country that transcends political party affiliations.

President Obama's comment on American exceptionalism has been often quoted, including in these blogs, because it's a defining comment.

He said he believed in American exceptionalism, just like Brits believe in Britain's exceptionalism and Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism. Not a big deal.

We have not passed along to the previous two, maybe three generations, an accurate understanding of what America is and what it stands for. Our children, for the most par,t do not understand the goodness and charity of the greatest nation on the Earth.

We now have a president who is a product of a failed education system, who travels the world apologizing for our country. And doing so to second rate nations and organizations who contribute little to nothing to mankind.

Two visions for America.

One ignores the goodness and the greatness of this "city on a hill" and diligently works to remake us into the image of just another European secular socialist nation.

The other says, "No, we are not Europe and we don't want to become Europe." Our Founders chose a different path. They chose not to be Europe. They rejected Europe. They choose to build a nation framed around God-given freedoms that were protected, not given, by government--- free enterprise and personal freedoms.

They chose principle and values as a charter and mission and thanked "the strong hand of Providence" for their miraculous victory in the Revolutionary War---a war they should not have been able to win.

The Judeo-Christian values and principles upon which this country was built, and a prevailing Christian consensus in the culture, continued well after our Founding documents were framed and served to resist the import of secularism and humanism from France, Germany and England until the latter part of the 19th century.

Colleges were built by Christians and Christian organizations, biblical principals were openly taught, character and morality were instilled in our youth.

It was 72 years after our founding, that Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) became the first college chartered by atheists.Following this, humanists gradually took over our teacher's colleges, moving the headwater of American education to what would become the citadel of secularism---Columbia University.

It was at Columbia that John Dewey and his secularist disciples created what became known as "progressive education". Supported by a belief in relativism, "progressive education" was secular and began a decline in both quality of education and morality in our country.

As Judeo-Christian values were stripped from the culture, moral training and character building, that had long been an important part of our once great education system, were lost as well.

Now, several generations have not been taught what America is really about. We are culturally choking on artificial fairness, perverted tolerance and political correctness. The emperor has no clothes.

This election is a referendum on what we want America to be. We have a president, a product of public education, who is intent on "remaking" America and is assisted by a legislative majority who will sell the soul of the country to retain power.

Never has the divide been more evident than at this point in our history.

Lincoln said America is the last best hope for mankind. If we become Europe, we will no longer represent hope to anyone.

The lines are not blurred. There are two sides, two dreams, two destinies and America is deciding which path we will take.

Tuesday, June 08, 2010

Only a few years ago I, and I'm sure you as well, would have said "not a chance". However, the US Senate is expected to take up the UN Convention on Rights of the Child.

Rosemary Stein, spokesperson for the Christian Medical Association (CMA) says it is a dangerous treaty for the family and, "It takes away the parent's rights to rear their child and gives it to the government. The government becomes the caretaker and the guardian and the parent becomes the baby sitter."

After studying the UN Convention on Rights of the Child, Stein says, "I didn't know it was this insidious and at the same time, this overwhelming. It goes over everything---what you teach them, what you do with them[and] how they're reared."

She points out a case in Germany where the government has passed laws that ban parents from homeschooling as an example of where these policies lead.

She also notes a case in Great Britain where a 16-year-old asked her parents to let her boyfriend move in and share her bedroom. When the parents said no, she sued and won.

Nothing is sacred to secular socialists. Not marriage, not the family, not even parental rights.

In our current state, who knows what the majority in the US Senate would do with this matter?

This is yet another reason why the upcoming elections are a matter of life and death for our culture and our country.

Monday, June 07, 2010

In our recent Faith and Freedom survey, while attaching top priority to the issues of marriage, family and the sanctity of life, nearly to a one you expressed grave concern for the economy and the way the Obama administration is handling our economic crisis and the direction he is taking the nation.

A web site, endoftheamericandream.com, has listed 50 economic stats that are very revealing and in many cases nearly impossible to believe. The web site has created and documented this list from a number of sources. Each statistic is linked to the source.

Please familiarize yourself with this information and share it with all your contacts.

Hopefully this information will inspire citizens to become involved in the upcoming elections.

#34) According to RealtyTrac, foreclosure filings were reported on 367,056 properties in March 2010, an increase of nearly 19 percent from February, an increase of nearly 8 percent from March 2009 and the highest monthly total since RealtyTrac began issuing its report in January 2005.

#31) The Mortgage Bankers Association recently announced that more than 10 percent of all U.S. homeowners with a mortgage had missed at least one payment during the January to March time period. That was a record high and up from 9.1 percent a year ago.

#23) To make up for a projected 2010 budget shortfall of $280 million, Detroit issued $250 million of 20-year municipal notes in March. The bond issuance followed on the heels of a warning from Detroit officials that if its financial state didn't improve, it could be forced to declare bankruptcy.

#16) U.S. government-provided benefits (including Social Security, unemployment insurance, food stamps and other programs) rose to a record high during the first three months of 2010.

#15) 39.68 million Americans are now on food stamps, which represents a new all-time record. But things look like they are going to get even worse. The U.S. Department of Agriculture is forecasting that enrollment in the food stamp program will exceed 43 million Americans in 2011.

#13) U.S. law enforcement authorities claim that there are now over 1 million members of criminal gangs inside the country. These 1 million gang members are responsible for up to 80% of the crimes committed in the United States each year.

#12) The U.S. health care system was already facing a shortage of approximately 150,000 doctors in the next decade or so, but thanks to the health care "reform" bill passed by Congress, that number could swell by several hundred thousand more.

#4) According to a new report based on U.S. Census Bureau data, only 26 percent of American teens between the ages of 16 and 19 had jobs in late 2009 which represents a record low since statistics began to be kept back in 1948.

#1) According to the Tax Foundation’s Microsimulation Model, to erase the 2010 U.S. budget deficit, the U.S. Congress would have to multiply each tax rate by 2.4. Thus, the 10 percent rate would be 24 percent, the 15 percent rate would be 36 percent, and the 35 percent rate would have to be 85 percent.

Friday, June 04, 2010

US District Judge Janet C Hall ruled on Memorial Day, that two public high schools could not hold their 2010 graduations inside a local church.

Yes, the ACLU filed the lawsuit.

It's interesting how Judge Janet came to her conclusion that it would be an unconstitutional endorsement of religion.

Before making the decision, she visited the church in Bloomfield, Conn.

She reported that those attending the graduation ceremonies would encounter, among other things, the following:

1. A large cross on the roof of the church.

2. A large central cross at the main entrance.

3. A large cross behind the stage.

"Therefore," the judge concluded, "by requiring a graduating senior ---or a parent of one---to enter First Cathedral Church in order to be able to participate in his or her graduation---or to watch their child graduate---Enfield Public Schools has coerced plaintiffs to support religion."

This decision is being appealed.

What do you think? Did the judge make the right decision? Post your thoughts.

Thursday, June 03, 2010

Although he chose not to make an appearance at Arlington National Cemetery to honor those who have served our country, as presidents normally do, President Obama did not miss his date with destiny in proclaiming June 2010, "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender Pride Month."

On Friday, before leaving for his ill-fated encounter with Mother Nature in Illinois, he took time to proclaim for the second time as President, June 2010, to be LGBT Month, however this year he also emphasized his intention to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, elevate homosexual relationships to that of marriage, secure "adoption rights" for homosexuals and repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" military policy.

He sends Vice President Biden to celebrate and honor our American heroes while he declares the entire month of June a national time to honor, celebrate and elevate perversion.

A conflicted President and a confused culture.

The President says he does not favor homosexual marriage, yet as Peter Spriggs from Family Research points out, "Every policy he supports is designed to undermine the traditional definition of marriage or undermine the uniqueness of marriage as a union between a man and a woman."

Part of his proclamation says, "Much work remains to fulfill our nation's promise of equal justice under law for LBGT Americans. That is why we must give committed gay couples the same rights and responsibilities afforded any married couple, and repeal the Defense of Marriage Act."Repeal the defense of marriage as the homosexuals are demanding, but not favor homosexual marriage?

Incremental deconstruction of marriage and the family.

When the defense of marriage is gone, the President will stand by and say there is no law or policy that prohibits same-sex marriage, so there is really nothing I can do about it.

Will polygamists receive the same support? There are those asking for it now. If not, why not?

A conflicted man.

And what about his priorities?

Andrea Lafferty, with Traditional Values Coalition, told CNSNEWS, "We have a nation that's facing great unemployment and economic crises and what is the President pushing? Gay Transgender stuff and gays in the military." She said, "They've been pushed ahead of dealing with the Gulf disaster."

Homosexual activists are applauding, while America prepares for an election.